Talk:Down syndrome

concrete thinking

What does "concrete thinking" mean, as mentioned in this article? Is this a common phrase? Bl4h 01:43, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

It refers to a limited ability to think abstractly. People who think concretely take most sentences literally and have trouble understanding analogies, metaphors, figures of speech, etc. alteripse 04:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Lack of Action to Prevent Vandalism

This article is being vandalised on a daily basis. Can it be placed on limited editing privilages to prevent the constant reversion? I'm afraid I haven't a clue how to formally request this, but I think it needs doing. Anyone agree or disagree? Shinji nishizono 19:28, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Content dispute

I have made some edits recently, which have been reverted by Buddhipriya:[1]

I assert that my edits are improvements because:

• On the issue of male fertility, I point out that for there to be only 3 instances of males fathering children proves that fertility is almost entirely absent. 1 in 733 American males have Down syndrome - and that's in a country where 90% of Down syndrome fetuses are aborted before birth. There must be many millions of men with Down syndrome, of whom precisely three have managed to reproduce. Those 3 males, by the way, are likely to not have Down syndrome throughout their body - it's possible to have patches of flesh that are affected or not affected, so I reckon those 3 are not true Down syndrome patients.
• On the issue of whether it should be called Down or Down's syndrome, I work as a doctor in Australia and the commonest name for it is Down's. A more formal citation is already given at the end of the article. Maybe it's wrong to call it Down's, but that's the way it is, and I think it should go at the start of the article. I also note that Parkinson's syndrome, Klinefelter's syndrome and Cushing's syndrome are absolutely standard medical terminology.

What say you? I ask that you vote 'keep' or 'delete' for my edits. -Richardcavell 01:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for raising this content question. I reverted your changes not because I felt them to be wrong, but because they were not sourced, and you made a change to a statement that was sourced. By all means, if you have additional or even conflicting content, you are welcome to add it, so long as you do so in a manner consisted with the policies for Wikipedia:Attribution. Making a change to a sentence that already has a reference is problematic unless you are alleging that the source does not say what is attributed to it. If you wish to add additional point of view, please do so and cite your references. Since Wikipedia has no process for checking credentials, arguments from personal authority are not considered valid, which can be frustrating to editors who may be experts in their fields. Thank you for contributing, don't hesitate to use the talk pages to develop consensus around any new ideas you wish to present.

On the issue of calling it Down's Syndrome, since some of the national web sites use that variant, it is not likely to be controversial. E.g. [2] Perhaps "Down's" is British usage? Buddhipriya 02:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Alright, no one seems to want to talk about this so I'll just give up. Content dispute closed. - Richard Cavell 23:52, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Mental retardation

I think this sentence should be re-written:

"Individuals with Down syndrome can have a lower than average cognitive ability"

This sounds like "usually, Down's Syndrome individuals have average cognitive ability". Unfortunately, individuals with down's syndrome usually have a lower cognitive ability. Can someone edit this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vollkorn (talk • contribs) 21:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC).

picture

does this kid have down syndrome? if he does should it be included?I äm Parañø!d 02:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC) File:Downsydromclown.JPG